Category Archives: Obama Administration

I’m thinking that I may want to reconsider my position on things – it appears that the more radical and revolutionary you are, the more awards, employment opportunities, and face time you get.

Take for example Van Jones; although he was ousted from the White House for his trutherism, his radical ideological beliefs, namely being a self-professed communist, he is still receiving accolades from the liberal community. Van Jones will receive the coveted NAACP Image award this year and will also rejoin the Center for American Progress {be wary of that word Progress} a liberal “think” tank.

Van Jones calls himself an environmentalist, but more so in the sense of social justice; a term that many of us have been schooled in over the last couple of years. Social justice is just a nicer term used to confuse the masses that calls for the redistribution of wealth because of all the inequalities and unfairness in the world. Somewhere in life, I found that inequality and unfairness were part of human nature and it was up to an individual to make the most of what they were given and strive for success at every turn. I believe what I’m getting at is the “pursuit of happiness,” and there is a reason that the word pursuit is in the phrase; happiness isn’t handed to us – we have to earn respect and earn success.

Van Jones on the other hand, believes in the idea of welfare, hand outs and redistribution. He is a self-avowed communist who believes that nobody should be in jail, in fact they should all have green jobs to rehabilitate themseleves… something I’m more than a little skeptical of.

A little synopsis of what Van Jones is up to and some additional benefits that he is receiving:

In his first interview since stepping down as President Obama’s environmental adviser on Sept. 5, Jones said that a green jobs policy represents the best chance of both aiding poor Americans and bridging the political divide.

“When the food fight is over, there’s one spot of clean common ground in American politics, and that is the need for us to be leading on energy, clean energy, and for us as a country to be more secure with all those jobs,” Jones said Tuesday.

Jones, who has been consulting for companies and nonprofits on environmental issues, will start teaching at Princeton University in June and is rejoining the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, next month. On Friday, he will receive the NAACP’s President’s Award, for achievement in public service, the organization announced Tuesday.

Not surprising, another liberal ivy league school is also patting Van Jones on the back where he will teach and commute from DC to southern New Jersey.

This past weekend the Obama administration worked incredibly hard [sarcasm included] to establish a deficit panel. If any American doesn’t realize that we have an unprecedented deficit, they must be living in a cave or a bunker for 60 years.

Obama has named a Republican from the Reagan era, Alan K. Simpson and a Democrat from the Clinton era, Erskine Bowles to lead this new commission established to curtail the deficits that may wind up paralyzing this nation.

The commission that Mr. Obama plans would have 18 members, 10 Democrats and 8 Republicans. The president would name one other Republican and three additional Democrats, none of whom would be administration officials or lawmakers. For the remaining 12 members, the leaders of both parties in the House and Senate each would choose three lawmakers.

The commission would try to recommend by December — after the midterm elections — how to balance the budget by the fiscal year 2015, not counting interest payments on the debt; those are projected to be nearly 3 percent of the gross domestic product that year, a size that most economists say is the maximum acceptable. Also, Mr. Obama wants a commission to propose longer term changes in revenues and the entitlement programs to rein in a debt projected to be 77 percent of the economy’s output by 2020. A supermajority of 14 of the 18 members would have to concur to reach a deal.

We definitely need to resolve our debt crisis and stop building our deficits taht will enslave younger generations to the government and other foreign investors. However, I find this interesting since Obama is requesting a commission but he is in fact the one president who has spent more than all others combined in his first year. He is also creating unsustainable budgets that could create disasterous results in the long-run. Again, as Michelle Malkin aptly calls it, this is kabuki theater. This is probably another ploy to appear as if he is working to help, but really has no intention of turning from his ideological partisanship of big spending, high taxing, big government. None of this surprises me in the least now that Politico is reporting that he is already working on his 2012 campaign.

So far only 3 leading Senate Democrats have been named to the panel and the rest have yet to be named. This is supposed to be a bipartisan panel, but the Democrats, along with Bowles will have the upperhand with 11 members to 9 Republicans.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has named Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad of North Dakota, Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus of Montana and Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin of Illinois to the panel, which is charged with recommending spending cuts and possible revenue increases to bring the deficit to managable levels by 2015.

I trust the current crop of bureaucrats as far as I can throw them, and for a 5′ 0” tall female that’s a pretty short distance! I’m not sure anybody in our congress knows how spending, business, or finances work from a real world perspective so this will be interesting to watch.

Who knows, maybe this is what Obama meant when he was talking about green shoots and new jobs (bigger government and more commissions that just add to the inefficiency and bureaucracy).

Bernie Sanders, the self-professed far left socialist from Vermont, compares global warming that’s right, I mean climate change, or whatever they have changed it to, to fit their agenda, deniers to Nazi sympathizers/Holocaust deniers. The liberals are great at just cutting off debate by throwing carpet bombs at any opposition. Slinging words like Nazi and racist as often as they do, has taken away from the seriousness of these words, and the American public is getting tired of it.

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders is comparing climate change skeptics to those who disregarded the Nazi threat to America in the 1930s, adding a strident rhetorical shot to the already volatile debate over climate change.

“It reminds me in some ways of the debate taking place in this country and around the world in the late 1930s,” said Sanders, perhaps the most liberal member of the Senate, during a Senate hearing Tuesday. “During that period of Nazism and fascism’s growth-a real danger to the United States and democratic countries around the world- there were people in this country and in the British parliament who said ‘don’t worry! Hitler’s not real! It’ll disappear!”

Correct me if I’m wrong Bernie, but wasn’t your far left idol, FDR, one of those individuals who ignored warnings about World War II until Pearl Harbor was hit? I also believe if there is anybody who is currently denying a war and acting like Neville Chamberlain it’s our very own President and many of you in Congress.

Sanders’ reference to the Nazi threat is sure to enrage Republicans who are already skeptical of the science behind climate change. But Sanders wasn’t the only one throwing bombs at a hearing that was ostensibly about the EPA’s fiscal 2011 budget. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), who has called global warming a “hoax,” is asking for an investigation into the science used in the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the governing body on climate science.

Shouting down debate only proves that liberals are afraid that someone may find out that this was in fact the greatest hoax of our time; that their new beloved theology could be disproved by facts. The best form of democracy is healthy, civil debate, and I believe the American people want transparency on all issues that our government finds so important.

We are all well aware that the Obama administration is beholden to the unions like SEIU and the UAW who gave millions to then Senator Obama during his campaign for the White House. However, what many may not know, or have forgotten is the fact that Barack Obama signed three executive orders that would make it easier to favor unions and unionized companies.

The first executive order requires employers with federal contracts above $100,000 in value to post a notice in the workplace informing their employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), including the right to join a union. This order also repeals Executive Order 13201, issued by President Bush in 2001, that required federal contractors and subcontractors to post so-called “Beck notices.” Such notices, named after the Supreme Court’s decision in Communication Workers v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988) informed employees covered under the NLRA that they could not be required to join a union or maintain union membership in order to retain their jobs and that employees who are subject to a union security clause and choose not to be union members may object to the purposes for which mandatory union dues are used.

The second order applies to federal contractors who provide services to government buildings. While there are several exemptions, under this new executive order, when a federal agency changes contractors, the new contractor will be required to offer jobs to the non-supervisory employees of its predecessor. This order is designed to try to ensure that when a unionized contractor is replaced, its successor will be obliged under existing labor laws to bargain with the original contractor’s labor union.

The third order prevents federal contractors from being reimbursed in federal funds for money spent to oppose (or support) union organizing efforts among their employees, which could violate first amendment rights if ever challenged in a court of law due to government interference and a company’s freedom of speech.

That’s why the latest news coming from the Obama administration is very disconcerting since they are planning on supporting proposals that will favor unions and unionized companies bidding on federal contracts, which will only increase the size of the government, the amount of bureaucracy, and the cost of contracts. However, it’s not anything we don’t already know since Obama’s philosophy seems more like “Go big, or go… you know something? just go big because you won’t have a home by the time our administration is through.”

The proposals, collectively known as “High Road Contracting Policy,” were first reported earlier this month. The basic elements of the policy would give preference to companies bidding on federal contracts that pay their hourly workers a “living wage” and provide health insurance, employer-funded pension plans and paid sick days.

Following the report Republicans slammed the proposal, with Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma referring to it as “backdoor card check.” Other critics, led by Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, worry the new rules would increase the cost of government contracting by as much as 20 percent, or more than $100 billion annually, while further slowing the procurement process.

Proponents of the proposals, including the Center for American Progress and the Economic Policy Institute, argue government contracting should be used as a vehicle for expanding the middle class and many of the workers that would be impacted by the changes end up costing the government more through public assistance programs such as Medicaid and food stamps. David Madland of CAP also pointed to studies on the state and local level that show no cost increase following the implementation of similar policies.

However, the White House did admit that contracting costs would increase if this proposal went through. Pardon me if I’m a little skeptical and a little tired of unions being used as the end-all-be-all of the middle class. Most of the middle class are professional workers or even blue collared workers who don’t belong to unions. Take for example my father – he’s a mechanic but doesn’t belong to the UAW, much like many of his co-workers. Does he make a ton of money? No, he’s just simply middle class and thus it is completely disingenuous for anybody to equate unions with the middle class at all times. It seems as if the current crop of bureaucrats would love nothing more than for the true middle class to be unionized and therefore controlled and dependent upon the federal government.

And lest we forget some of the eye-opening clips of Obama speaking with organizations like SEIU:

{My favorite part is Obama telling SEIU that they should want a leader who can tell the truth… Interesting that he’s now been caught in many lies, most recently ACORN}

I was recently at a rally in downtown Annapolis last Wednesday night, held by several organizations to get the state of Maryland back on the side of the people rather than under the thumb of one-party rule. Several liberals who were protesting the event decided they would start acting up and what better way to act up than to scream racist at every individual who walks by? What good does that do anybody and for what reason? Why is it the liberals who are always pointing out the differences in people rather than what unites us and makes us equal?

These ‘children’ outside of the rally started whining to the police officers that broke up the chaos. It immediately turned into the blame game – heaven forbid any one of them act like grown-ups, apologize, and let it go. This tends to be the norm from what I have observed from liberals; spoiled children who want everything their way and have no concern for those around them as long as they get what they want.

I like the following analogy; Veruca Salt is to Oompa Loompas as Liberals are to public policy. I can hear them now: “But, Daddy, I want an Oompa Loompa NOW!” They want immediate gratification like a 5 year old in a toy store, throwing a temper tantrum if an adult says ‘NO,’ in hopes that the parent will eventually kowtow to the child (which has unfortunately become the norm in society).

Liberals want policy NOW – they don’t tend to read the bills, but because they sound nice, based on the game of semantics (loved by every liberal politician), they think that 2,000 page bureaucratic nightmares will create some type of Utopia in America.

The problem I have with Veruca Salt is her attitude problem and the sheer fact that she doesn’t even know what is involved in caring for an Oompa Loompa because she doesn’t know what it is; but because this new and exotic creature sounds and looks cool – she has to have it! She could wind up killing the poor thing because she doesn’t know what to do with it once she gets it or there could be tons of unintended consequences, and somebody inevitably is always left cleaning up the mess.

To be honest, I can understand why somebody under 30 still acts like Veruca Salt. Perhaps they are too sheltered, perhaps they have never experienced hard times, perhaps they still believe that Utopias exist, or perhaps they just haven’t worked long enough to owe the government. Those who I don’t understand, and feel have no business acting that way, are adults, especially politicians who have a hand in running our country — Case in point: Chuck Shumer.

Chuck Shumer is the epitome of egotistical elitist; a snob so to speak, who would seemingly say anything or stoop to any level just to remain ‘powerful’ in regards to the political arena.

Growing up in Connecticut and living around the limousine liberal elite has taught me that these individuals are nothing more than empty vessels floating along a shallow river of condescension and entitlement.

Chuck Shumer isn’t the only liberal to carry this haughty attitude – it certainly became patently obvious during his BFF, Martha Coakley’s campaign. Their hatred of average Americans is transparent, unlike the healthcare coverage on CSPAN that was promised by Obama’s administration.

I have to wonder, how intelligent or even how mature these politicians think they are when calling their peers names like tea-baggers? Do they believe that calling individuals perverted terms makes them look like pillars of the community? Do they think it makes them sound more intelligent and credible? If that is the case, they are sadly mistaken, because to most it makes them look like bitter, immature, adolescents; the same adolescents currently running amok in our government and spending money like a 16 year old with Daddy’s credit card. These are the very same congress critters who have been in the majority since 2006 and were running our economy into the ground during the stock market crash.

It’s easy for Americans to place blame on one individual like George Bush for the disaster called our economy in 2008, but guess what? Congress has more influence over the economy and over the regulations and oversight of the market than the president. And guess who was supposed to be in charge of those two things when this crisis hit? The liberals, yes, that’s correct, and I dare ask anybody who disagrees to look it up.

Speak of the devil, Barney Frank would like to change the rules in case Scott Brown wins Teddy Kennedy’s seat today… who cares about all the little people of America who elect these individuals that turn out to be wannabe dictators, right?

I don’t care if you were the valedictorian of your class at Harvard take the cotton out of your ears and stick it in your mouth – The American public no longer wants to hear what you have to say, we just want you to start listening!

I think it’s time to take a look at some of the best quotes illustrating liberal arrogance in recent history:

Chuck Shumer: Then the flight attendant came by again and told Schumer that everyone on the flight was waiting for him to turn off his phone. He asked to finish his conversation but was told he could not; he then hung up and, according to the aide, he argued about the rule banning him from speaking on the phone.

When the flight attendant walked away, the aide told Politico, Schumer turned to Gillibrand and referred to the woman as a “bitch.”

New York Sen. Charles Schumer, who famously hammered then-Sen. Alfonse D’Amato for calling him a “putz-head” in their hot 1998 campaign, was accused Thursday of stepping into the gutter himself after he sent out a fundraising e-mail in which he called Massachusetts Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown a “far-right tea-bagger.”

Obama: “You got into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

John Kerry: “You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.”

Harry Reid: “My staff tells me not to say this, but I’m going to say it anyway, in the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it’s true.”

Don’t forget that Harry also thinks the only reason Barack Obama was electable was his “light skin” and lack of “negro dialect.”

Chris Matthews: Video of Chris Matthews saying that all of the “teabaggers” are white, while talking with Mark McKinnon.

Matthews said, “they’re all white, all of them, every single one of them is white.” Mark McKinnon agreed with Matthews saying “I think that’s a fair characterization, predominately no question.”

Barney Frank: In this view, the role of the great majority of Americans is simply to buy the products produced, work happily for their wages, and leave all of the significant economic decisions to the capitalists.

Nancy Pelosi: Out of touch and calling the middle class (making up the majority of the tea party protests) “Astroturf” & wealthy: What we want is a new direction. In fact, in the President’s initiative – in the Recovery and in the Budget – 95% of the American people get a tax cut. This is a tax cut for the great middle class. This initiative is funded by the high end – we call call it astroturf, it’s not really a grassroots movement. It’s astroturf by some of the wealthiest people in America to keep the focus on tax cuts for the rich instead of for the great middle class.
Barbara Boxer: “Do me a favor,” she said, “could say ‘senator’ instead of ‘ma’am?’ It’s just a thing, I worked so hard to get that title, so I’d appreciate it, yes, thank you.”

Boxer: “Sir, they passed it. They passed it. Now, also, if that isn’t interesting you to we’ll quote John Grant, who is the CEO of 100 Black Men of Atlanta.” [She goes on to read quote.]

Alford: “Madam Chair, that is condescending to me. I’m the National Black Chamber of Commerce and you’re trying to put up some other black group to pit against me.”

Boxer: “If this gentlemen were here he would be proud that he was being quoted.”

Alford: “He should have been invited!”

Alan Grayson: If you get sick, America, the Republican health care plan is this: Die quickly. That’s right. The Republicans want you to die quickly if you get sick.

Now, that brings us back around to the Massachusetts Senate race, which will give us a new Senator tonight:

The public can choose a cookie cutter liberal with a bad attitude like the ones referenced above, or a new face, with new ideas, who stands for more than entitlement to a seat and his own ego.

People like Shumer and Coakley are New England elites with law degrees; you don’t need to be a genius or a lawyer to hold a seat in our government; in fact the founding fathers never intended for that in the first place. Scott Brown may have graduated from law school but he’s spent years serving our country in a more important capacity, as a leader; as a member of our armed services.

Martha Coakley is a special interest, union loving, lobbyist kow-towing, big spending, big government, entitled, limousine liberal. I’m tired of the same old same old and it’s time for a change, especially in a liberal hot-bed like Massachusetts. (I can at least spell the state correctly, unlike Martha and her staff).

Martha Coakley’s new slogan is open mouth, insert foot. She is quickly replacing Joe Biden as Obama’s Czar of Gaffe.

Martha as of late has also tried to air attack ads painting Brown as a UPS truck driver who will ship jobs overseas, offending not only UPS, but truck drivers, along with Obama’s comments this weekend that anyone can afford a truck… Excuse me sir, but that’s not true – at least not for a majority of people who are jobless at the moment – maybe your liberal elite buddies can afford such luxuries but not the average American just trying to make a living.

I’m getting so tired of the name calling, the fear mongering, and the condescending attitudes of the Democrat party. It’s time to usher in a new era of principled, uncorrupted individuals. It’s high time we give some new faces the chance to turn around a ship that’s headed for an iceberg. We need people who understand that serving in this great country means serving their constituents and not themselves. We need people who have worked in the private sector or don’t feel that they deserve a seat just because it was held by a late senator of the same ideology. We need people who want to put government back on the side of the people. I don’t want anymore career politicians and neither should you – let’s start electing grown-ups with standards.

I hope that Massachusetts does the right thing in electing Scott Brown – it’s time that people vote based not on party affiliation but on trust and who they believe will be honest, sincere, and do the best job.

On Sunday, December 13th, The Guardian of the UK reported that North Korea was caught smuggling arms through an underground weapons trade network. The weapons that were discovered in an aircraft’s manifest, which was supposed to deliver ‘oil-drilling equipment.’ The weapons that were found were not nuclear of nature or seemed to be products that could create a bomb but this is still incredibly significant – any black-marketed arms being sold between countries acting as an underground arms trade network is incredibly disconcerting and worrisome. The plane that was discovered and searched in Thailand was found to be carrying items such as: rocket-propelled grenades, missile and rocket launchers, missile tubes, surface-to-air missile launchers, spares and other heavy equipment.

A lethal cargo of rocket launchers, grenades and other weapons seized in Thailand at the weekend may be just a glimpse of what US and UN investigators say is a global North Korean illegal arms smuggling network used to finance its proscribed nuclear weapons programme.

Authorities in Bangkok said today it was unclear where the plane carrying the 35-tonnes of arms, an Ilyushin IL-76 registered in Georgia, was heading. But suspicion immediately fell on Iran, the destination of a previous illegal weapons shipment impounded in the United Arab Emirates in July. Panitan Wattanayagorn, a Thai government spokesman, said the plane had initially planned to refuel in Sri Lanka. For unknown reasons, the crew asked to make an emergency landing in Bangkok on Friday. Sri Lanka denied any knowledge of the arms shipment. There was also speculation in Bangkok that it was destined for Pakistan or Afghanistan.

Thai officials, who detained four crewmen from Kazakhstan and one from Belarus, said they acted on tip-offs from US and other unnamed intelligence agencies that the plane was carrying North Korean-made weapons in contravention of a UN security council ban on arms exports. The ban was strengthened in June, after North Korea’s isolated regime test-fired ballistic missiles and detonated a nuclear bomb.

The same types of countries who many have suspected of being in ‘cahoots’ for some time, have finally shown that they are in fact engaged in an arms trading network with the final destination possibly being Iran. North Korea just wants to stay afloat and make money, estimated to be nearly $1B via this type of arms trading, while Iran has other sinister reasons for being the Point of Destination (POD).

1. The Japanese TV crew got in close during interrogation of the foreign crew of this aircraft. The Japanese zeroed in, using telephoto lenses, on the Thai police confession sheets that the men were apparently been given to sign (that they were trafficking in weapons).

2. The crew zoomed in on the attached BILL OF LADING issued for the cargo in question.

3. The BILL OF LADING was issued by AIR KORYO the national flag carrier for North Korea (and used in the past for espionage and smuggling).

4. The crews then went over to the Air Koryo sales office in Bangkok and burst into the door, confronting a North Korean local employee, showing him video of what they had taken. He got nervous, angry, showed them the door and only said “this must be a fake document. That is not ours”.

5. Meanwhile, the crew said they were heading for Ukraine with the massive cargo of weaponry. However, the Japanese TV crew was at it again, they got a close look at the Bill of Lading with the destination, filmed it, and re-aired it. It was clearly handwritten in English on the sheet “MEHRABAD AIRPORT” (Teheran),فرودگاه مهرآباد (IATA Code: THR) is an airport that serves Teheran, Iran. This airport is close to the city center of Teheran and is not used widely for commercial international arrivals and departures, and is also shared by the Iranian military.

6. Japanese crews called Iran in Farsi and grilled personnel of Mehrabad Airport but they also denied that such an aircraft was heading or scheduled to head to their airport, and seemed perturbed by the call.

7) The same Japanese TV network’s female reporter stationed to NYC on the same day “ambushed” the senior North Korean chief to the United Nations as he got out of his limousine going into the DPRK Office. She chased after him and said “North Korea was involved in the weapons shipment, and it is violation of UN sanctions, isn’t that correct?”. The North Korean diplomat ignored her completely, looked VERY pissed off, and stormed inside a building without saying a thing.

8) The Japanese crew not only called the airport in Iran to get details, they got ahold of the stipulated RECIPIENT in Iran at the airport on the Air Way Bill who was supposed to receive the weapons. They had his telephone number and called him directly, talking and grilling him in Farsi. He denied everything but you could tell of his shock and anger.

Summary of cargo at this time:

Multiple rocket launchers – two mobile units – and two dozen 240 mm unguided rockets. The total value of weapons found in 145 large boxes that weigh nearly 40 tons all up was estimated at around Baht 600 million.No nuclear munitions or weapons of mass destruction were found on board.

North Korea reportedly plans to ban foreigners from the country from Sunday until early February, apparently to allow unrest caused by this month’s shock currency reform to die down.

Ju Sang-song, the minister of People’s Security, is in China, according to the North’s Korean Central News Agency, though it gave no reason for his visit. The trip by the North’s top internal security official may aim to seek cooperation from Beijing in preventing a mass exodus of North Korean middle class citizens angry over the devaluation of their savings.

One source in China said that Pyongyang would bar foreigners from entering the country temporarily at the end or beginning of a year, when customs officials along the border with China are on leave for year-end holidays, but banning them until February is “quite uncommon.”

Experts say this could herald a visit by Kim Jong-il to China, since the paranoid North Korean leader likes to ensure maximum security along the route of his special armored train. Chinese President Hu Jintao invited Kim to visit at a “convenient” time when he met Choi Tae-bok, the chairman of the North’s Supreme People’s Assembly, in October. Kim has visited China four times, and twice (in 2001 and 2006) they fell in January.

It would seem to me that there is much more for Kim Jong-il to be concerned about now that the latest scandal has broken through to the surface.

So what does a dictator, who instigates missile launches, participates in illegal arms trading, and treats his DVD collection better than his people get? A letter from our one and only president, Barack Obama. That’s right, the ‘oh-so’ intelligent, Harvard elitist, with tons minimal amounts of foreign policy experience wrote Kim Jong-il a letter. This is reminiscent of Carter’s letter to Khomeini – even George Bush and Bill Clinton took their time when writing to ‘Lil’ Kim, which was done after negotiations concluded, not before, or just for the heck of it.

President Obama has written a personal letter to North Korean leader Kim Jong Il that was delivered by the administration’s special envoy for North Korea during a visit to Pyongyang last week.

The existence of the letter has been closely held, with the administration insisting to its partners in disarmament talks with North Korea that it not be publicly discussed. State Department and White House officials confirmed this week that envoy Stephen W. Bosworth delivered a letter from Obama for Kim, but they declined to describe its contents.

“We do not comment on private diplomatic correspondence,” said White House National Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer.

Wait a second, wasn’t this president supposed to be the most transparent president ever? Seems like the only thing transparent is his need to align himself with dictators and enemies… I’m sure Kim Jong loves pen-pals. It’s now up to us to guess what he wrote to Mr. il; here it goes:

Dear ‘Lil’ Kim,

I loved your role in Team America, I felt that you really had a grasp on how to control and intimidate people. My favorite line from that movie was “You’re Breakin’ My Barrs’ Hans Brix.” Who knows, maybe that will be me once I concede all power to the UN and act as the next Neville Chamberlain.

But in all honesty Kimmy, I’m jealous of the fact that you can command so much power and everybody worships you, if only I could settle down these nasty tea party protesters. How does one obtain 150% approval ratings by the way? Mine is already below 50%. I’m thinking I need some help – you don’t happen to have a little red book that lays out your strategy, do you?

Also, any pointers on controlling the media? I thought I was doing a fairly decent job, but every once and a while, they ask me a real pesky question that I have trouble answering – and don’t get me started on Fox.

Let’s you, me, Fidel, Hugo, Ahmadenijad, & Putin get together real soon for a ‘beer summit.’ The last one I held was a huge success.

Happy Holidays & a Merry Kwanzikadanmas.

Love,

Bammy

Update: NNN News of Japan has recently released live streaming video of the illegal arms found in Thailand being carried by a North Korean aircraft, headed for Iran.

Live stream can be seen here. (Thanks again to the great investigative work by FreeRepublic.com)

Hypocrite, Eric Holder, in 2002, says the Gitmo terrorists aren’t covered under the Geneva Convention. What article in the Geneva Convention you ask? Well, it’s Article IV and it goes a little something like this:

A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfill the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

3. Members of regular armed forceswho profess allegiance to a government [not a deity] or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.

4. Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model.

5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.

6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:

1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment.

2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties.

C. This Article shall in no way affect the status of medical personnel and chaplains as provided for in Article 33 of the present Convention.

In summary, these terrorists are not covered under the Geneva Convention because they are not normal soldiers, conducting war by international rules and guidelines. They are not regularly uniformed armed forces that abide by this Convention or any other treaties. These terror cells do not act on the behalf of a government, but rather as underground radical factions set up to terrorize other cultures and individuals. If they were uniformed soldiers, I would agree that they should be treated in a manner that abides by the Convention, however that has not, nor was it ever, the case.

A lot of thought and legal drafting went into the appropriateness of interrogation techniques used against Al-Qaeda and the terrorists at Gitmo who initiated the attacks on 9/11. I fail to see where the means of interrogation were unjust and completely inhumane? Waterboarding did not take place for every single prisoner and for those who were waterboarded, they could only be waterboarded so many times, while our men and women serving get waterboarded more often. Doctors are also required to stand by during a waterboarding session. As far as bugs in a corner or sleep deprivation – well that just reminds me of college, so what’s the big deal? Did these terrorists consider the lives or feelings of anybody before they attacked innocent civilians? I will never understand how the liberal mind works – and maybe that’s a good thing.

Oh, and it would be nice for all the Bush bashers and the liberal elite media to at least acknowledge the hypocrisy of Holder and this administration…